Discussion: Culture of Salzburg

[Palando]

Greetings. I would like to discuss a topic bothering me for quite some time, namely the culture of the Salzburg province. I would propose to change it to Bavarian instead of Austrian, because I'm of the opinion that the culture distribution here is based on modern borders.

Although, I'm not really content with the split into Bavarian and Austrian, as the latter culture tried to distinct itself from German and also a bit from Bavarian only after the World War II. But I guess that I have to accept this design choice as such a big culture probably would not be good for gamemplay reasons. One could also argue here that the different ruling dynasties (Wittelsbach <-> Habsburg) are enough to warrant this split into two cultures. However, this argument can not be applied to Salzburg.

The general consensu seems to be that culture is (mostly) based on the following three aspects:

• language
• traditions
• politics

The first two can be used to argue for both - Austrian and Bavarian, because in both "Bairisch" is spoken. There are some minor differences between the various varieties, but then we would need a seperate culture for Tyrol+Carinthia, Styria, the Upper Palatinate, Regensburg, and maybe for every village, too. Considering them as the same is the best approach here. As for traditions an example is Salzburg's Rupertikiritag, a so called "Dult". A "Dult" is something like a fair in south-eastern Germany (mostly Bavaria). Other Dults take place for example in Regensburg, Au(Munich), Landshut, Passau, ... . I have to admit, that I don't know any (bigger) Dult in Austria (except obv. Salzburg), but maybe someone can help.


I would regard the politics as a deciding factor. Historically, Salzburg was a part of Bavaria, and the archbishops gained more and more sovereignity and independence in the 13th and 14th century. This culminated into Ortolf von Weißeneck(1343-1365) becoming the first archbishop to become prince of the HRE. Throughout nearly the whole time span of the game, Salzburg was also considered as a political part of Bavaria (-> Circle of Bavaria, this was at least considered for putting Salzburg into the Upper Bavarian territory).
During the last 15 years of the game, Salzburg was part of Austria (1805-1810, 1816-1820) and of Bavaria (1810-1815).

In total, Salzburg had a political past with Bavaria, a political presence with Bavaria (Circle of Bavaria) and only a common future (last few years, but mostly out of the game's time) with Austria.


What do you think? Which is the more suitable culture for Salzburg? Maybe even someone from the team (@Trin Tragula ) can explain the reasoning behind Salzburg being Austrian?

 

[AirikrStrife]

I came to the same conclusion that Salzburg should have Bavarian culture after researching my slovenia thread. Otto Brunner's Land and lordship structures of governance in medieval Austria, treats Salzburg as Bavarian.

 

[Trin Tragula]

I am certainly open to arguments about the culture of Salzburg. Its assignation predates my time with the company.
As the borders don't predate me I _can_ at least tell you that the current ones are based on the archbishopric of Salzburg in the era (though simplified for sanity as is often the case in the HRE).

 

[Palando]

I am certainly open to arguments about the culture of Salzburg. Its assignation predates my time with the company.
As the borders don't predate me I _can_ at least tell you that the current ones are based on the archbishopric of Salzburg in the era (though simplified for sanity as is often the case in the HRE).

Many thanks for your response. I already supposed that the culture of Salzburg was before your time.
So can I safely assume, that you would like more arguments/texts regarding Salzburg's culture?

As to the borders: Maybe I was not that clear, but I'm absolutely content with Salzburg's borders.(Maybe you are refering to Berchtesgaden being a part of modern Bavaria, whereas it belonged to Austria nearly the whole game's time span?)
Here an interesting link how the archbishopric expanded: http://www.phil.uni-passau.de/fileadmin/dokumente/lehrstuehle/frenz/folien/Folie989.jpg

 

[TheDungen]

Is there even cause for a separate Austrian culture in 1444? I'm no expert but Austrian became a thing because of Austria right and since a united Austria wasn't a thing in 1444 it makes sense the culture wouldn't exist yet.

 

[holyvigil]

Many thanks for your response. I already supposed that the culture of Salzburg was before your time.
So can I safely assume, that you would like more arguments/texts regarding Salzburg's culture?

As to the borders: Maybe I was not that clear, but I'm absolutely content with Salzburg's borders.(Maybe you are refering to Berchtesgaden being a part of modern Bavaria, whereas it belonged to Austria nearly the whole game's time span?)
Here an interesting link how the archbishopric expanded: http://www.phil.uni-passau.de/fileadmin/dokumente/lehrstuehle/frenz/folien/Folie989.jpg

Links to any sources or books are always helpful. Then we know you're not the only person who believes what you say.

 

[Palando]

Is there even cause for a separate Austrian culture in 1444? I'm no expert but Austrian became a thing because of Austria right and since a united Austria wasn't a thing in 1444 it makes sense the culture wouldn't exist yet.

The population of Austria and Bavaria originate from the Bavarii (Bajuwaren) which settled in the corresponding regions during the Migration Period.

At the beginning of the HRE these lands were united: Duchy of Bavaria in the 10th century
And then partitioned into a Duchy of Carinthia and a Duchy of Bavaria (together with the "Austrian core land"): Split between Duchy of Bavaria and Carinthia

The dispute between Welfs and Hohenstaufen lead to an independent Ostarrichi/Marcha Orientalis granted to the Babenbergs in 1156. While Barbarossa gave the reduced Bavaria to the Wittelsbachs in 1180. The Wittelsbachs from then ruled Bavaria until 1918.

The permanent unification of "modern" Austria first started with Emperor Rudolf I. of Habsburg who acquired the "core land" (Upper and Lower Austria) together with Styria. Tyrol was added to the Habsburg domain in 1363 (between 1341-1363 it was Bavarian), Carinthia and Krain were permanently added in 1335 and big parts of Vorarlberg were acquired in 1451.
Map from 1378

Thus in total: At game start there was a political division between these two parts - the Habsburg domain <-> the Wittelsbach domain. So one could say that ingame Bavarian represents Wittelsbach Bavarian, whereas Austrian represents Habsburg Bavarian. Yet I have to say, that this is quite arbitrary, because otherwise we would need a different culture for many HRE tags (Hessian instead of Rhenish, Brandenburgian instead of Saxon, a split between Westfalian and Lower Saxon, ...). Granted, Austria and Bavaria were in a different Imperial Circle, while e.g. Saxony and Brandenburg where in the Saxon one. (Imperial Circles)


Languagewise, the heritage of the Bavarii/Bajuwaren is still present: Map of the Bavarian Dialect
If one would go from this, we would need a different culture for Tyrol+Carinthia and for the (northern) Upper Palatinate.
In modern times, Vienna and Munich became "isles": Finer and more modern Map of the Bavarian Dialects
Furthermore, in modern times the influence between each other became bigger (TV, cars, ...).

Important Disclaimer: This grouping is pretty neat, but one should keep in mind that even within one of those classifications there can be huge differences (10km can sometimes make a huge difference in pronounciation as well as thesaurus). It is also possible that you find "isles" within these groups which one would rather put into another group just fromt the sounds and the vocab.

In total: Splitting it according to language is a bad idea. The whole Bavarian language is enough similiar to regard it as one.

 

[AirikrStrife]

Brandenburgian instead of Saxon, a split between Westfalian and Lower Saxon

totally endorsing these splits

 

[Palando]

totally endorsing these splits

Then only written Westfalian, and not this pesky Westphalian derived from Napoleon's model state!

 

[AirikrStrife]

Then only written Westfalian, and not this pesky Westphalian derived from Napoleon's model state!

Lübsch was the lingua franca of the hansa nd most of the northern german coast. I can't find the book atm but I read in a book on google that westfalian and lübsch were the two dominant dialects of middle saxon with their own political spheres

 

[TheDungen]

The population of Austria and Bavaria originate from the Bavarii (Bajuwaren) which settled in the corresponding regions during the Migration Period.

At the beginning of the HRE these lands were united: Duchy of Bavaria in the 10th century
And then partitioned into a Duchy of Carinthia and a Duchy of Bavaria (together with the "Austrian core land"): Split between Duchy of Bavaria and Carinthia

The dispute between Welfs and Hohenstaufen lead to an independent Ostarrichi/Marcha Orientalis granted to the Babenbergs in 1156. While Barbarossa gave the reduced Bavaria to the Wittelsbachs in 1180. The Wittelsbachs from then ruled Bavaria until 1918.

The permanent unification of "modern" Austria first started with Emperor Rudolf I. of Habsburg who acquired the "core land" (Upper and Lower Austria) together with Styria. Tyrol was added to the Habsburg domain in 1363 (between 1341-1363 it was Bavarian), Carinthia and Krain were permanently added in 1335 and big parts of Vorarlberg were acquired in 1451.
Map from 1378

Thus in total: At game start there was a political division between these two parts - the Habsburg domain <-> the Wittelsbach domain. So one could say that ingame Bavarian represents Wittelsbach Bavarian, whereas Austrian represents Habsburg Bavarian. Yet I have to say, that this is quite arbitrary, because otherwise we would need a different culture for many HRE tags (Hessian instead of Rhenish, Brandenburgian instead of Saxon, a split between Westfalian and Lower Saxon, ...). Granted, Austria and Bavaria were in a different Imperial Circle, while e.g. Saxony and Brandenburg where in the Saxon one. (Imperial Circles)


Languagewise, the heritage of the Bavarii/Bajuwaren is still present: Map of the Bavarian Dialect
If one would go from this, we would need a different culture for Tyrol+Carinthia and for the (northern) Upper Palatinate.
In modern times, Vienna and Munich became "isles": Finer and more modern Map of the Bavarian Dialects
Furthermore, in modern times the influence between each other became bigger (TV, cars, ...).

Important Disclaimer: This grouping is pretty neat, but one should keep in mind that even within one of those classifications there can be huge differences (10km can sometimes make a huge difference in pronounciation as well as thesaurus). It is also possible that you find "isles" within these groups which one would rather put into another group just fromt the sounds and the vocab.

In total: Splitting it according to language is a bad idea. The whole Bavarian language is enough similiar to regard it as one.

On the other hand austrian+ bavarian would make a very large culture. Are there any more feasible cultures to break of from the block. I have heard that in the alps towards Switzerland there is a Austrian which is much closer to swiss than to Austrian for an example.

 

[Palando]

On the other hand austrian+ bavarian would make a very large culture. Are there any more feasible cultures to break of from the block. I have heard that in the alps towards Switzerland there is a Austrian which is much closer to swiss than to Austrian for an example.

That would be Vorarlberg/County of Montfort which as of now does not exist. It would be a split of the Tyrol and the Ravensburg province.
You can also see it in the dialects map, but here it is more precisely:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/83/Vorarlberg_in_Austria.svg

That's also why I wrote in the main post that I can live with this split, but yet Salzburg should become a Bavarian culture tag.

 

[TheDungen]

That would be Vorarlberg/County of Montfort which as of now does not exist. It would be a split of the Tyrol and the Ravensburg province.
You can also see it in the dialects map, but here it is more precisely:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/83/Vorarlberg_in_Austria.svg

That's also why I wrote in the main post that I can live with this split, but yet Salzburg should become a Bavarian culture tag.

Yes sorry that seems fine I'm just brainstorming.

 

[Ak91]

t think u have right but disagree with ur suggestion - Im upper Austrian myself and think that bavaria and us have much more together rest/nothern germany, cause our roots lie in the lagobardon tribes and the donau as trade area .
but if u change salzburg into bavaria, u could also change linz into it. tirol would be an own and steiermark also - so just vienna itself stays austrian itself.
as it is, is it a good splitt up for gameplay.
and historical (not cultural/there we would be the same) was salzburg always more on the Ostariche (beginning) side and geographical also more in the alpine region.

 

[Palando]

t think u have right but disagree with ur suggestion - Im upper Austrian myself and think that bavaria and us have much more together rest/nothern germany, cause our roots lie in the lagobardon tribes and the donau as trade area .
but if u change salzburg into bavaria, u could also change linz into it. tirol would be an own and steiermark also - so just vienna itself stays austrian itself.
as it is, is it a good splitt up for gameplay.
and historical (not cultural/there we would be the same) was salzburg always more on the Ostariche (beginning) side and geographical also more in the alpine region.

Well I agree that Bavarian and Austrian come really close, because of the heritage of the Bavarii/Bajuwaren.
My reasoning for changing Salzburg is a bit different: I believe that the split between Bavarian and Austrian was made for gameplay reasons, and that Bavarian represents Wittelsbach Bavaria while Austrian represents Habsburg Bavaria (habsburgisches Baiern). Wether this is the true reasoning is only known by the devs, but maybe @Trin Tragula knows why this split was done or how it is justified (although, Trin wasn't part of the team when the decision was made).

In this reasoning, Salzburg is only Bavarian, because it was considered a political part of Bavaria (Circle of Bavaria) even by the Habsburgs.

 

[Palando]

I came to the same conclusion that Salzburg should have Bavarian culture after researching my slovenia thread. Otto Brunner's Land and lordship structures of governance in medieval Austria, treats Salzburg as Bavarian.

Might you be so kind to search for the particular site in the book? Or even quote Otto Brunner?

 

[AirikrStrife]

Might you be so kind to search for the particular site in the book? Or even quote Otto Brunner?

186-187, it doesn't explicitly say Salzburgians are bavarians. It discusses the notion of Land in feudal southwest "germany" and treats Salzburg as an offshot of Bavaria.

 

[Zerodv]

The problem is that Salzburg the province controls more than just the plains and the city, it also has quite the amount of Alps territory that would fit more with Austrian.

 

[Twoflower]

The problem is that Salzburg the province controls more than just the plains and the city, it also has quite the amount of Alps territory that would fit more with Austrian.

Err, no. It represents the territory of the Archbishopric of Salzburg, thus the relevant question is whether that historical territory should rather be Austrian or Bavarian.
As far as I am concerned, the best solution would be to merge Bavarian and Austrian. If they remain separate cultures, Salzburg being Austrian is anachronistic. It had been subject to the Duchy of Bavaria until 1328, it had never been part of Austria before 1444, it became part of the Bavarian Imperial Circle (and not of the Austrian one) when the Reichskreise were created, and there were no Austrian attempts to conquer Salzburg before the end of the HRE.
Gameplay-wise, there is no need to give Austria an incentive to conquer Salzburg, either (to the contrary, it would be desirable to somewhat discourage Austrian conquest).

 

[Palando]

The problem is that Salzburg the province controls more than just the plains and the city, it also has quite the amount of Alps territory that would fit more with Austrian.

Here you can see the historical constituencies of the Archbishopric of Salzburg. All were part of Bavaria before Salzburg became independent.
Then there is no real difference between Austrian and Bavarian culture per sé. In fact, most of Austria is culturally closer to Bavaria (except the Upper Palatinate) than it Austria is to Tyrol.

Err, no. It represents the territory of the Archbishopric of Salzburg, thus the relevant question is whether that historical territory should rather be Austrian or Bavarian.
As far as I am concerned, the best solution would be to merge Bavarian and Austrian. If they remain separate cultures, Salzburg being Austrian is anachronistic. It had been subject to the Duchy of Bavaria until 1328, it had never been part of Austria before 1444, it became part of the Bavarian Imperial Circle (and not of the Austrian one) when the Reichskreise were created, and there were no Austrian attempts to conquer Salzburg before the end of the HRE.
Gameplay-wise, there is no need to give Austria an incentive to conquer Salzburg, either (to the contrary, it would be desirable to somewhat discourage Austrian conquest).

Exactly this is my reasoning. As I guess the devs don't want such a big culture blob, Salzburg (province and tag) should be Bavarian. As a side effect it would make Austrian a bit smaller.